From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: None (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=8.23.224.61; helo=out.smtp-auth.no-ip.com; envelope-from=kevin@carhart.net; receiver= Received: from out.smtp-auth.no-ip.com (smtp-auth.no-ip.com [8.23.224.61]) by hurricane.the-brannons.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82CAB77C83 for ; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 00:20:32 -0700 (PDT) X-No-IP: carhart.net@noip-smtp X-Report-Spam-To: abuse@no-ip.com Received: from carhart.net (unknown [99.52.200.227]) (Authenticated sender: carhart.net@noip-smtp) by smtp-auth.no-ip.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 352EF28A; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 00:20:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from carhart.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by carhart.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v7C7KT18023778; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 00:20:29 -0700 Received: from localhost (kevin@localhost) by carhart.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id v7C7KSWH023771; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 00:20:28 -0700 Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 00:20:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Kevin Carhart To: Karl Dahlke cc: Edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com In-Reply-To: <20170711055110.eklhad@comcast.net> Message-ID: References: <20170622224940.eklhad@comcast.net> <20170811074654.GB15710@odin> <20170711055110.eklhad@comcast.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.03 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [Edbrowse-dev] JS1 X-BeenThere: edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.24 Precedence: list List-Id: Edbrowse Development List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 07:20:32 -0000 > Is there really a site that *needs* timers faster than 500ms for nonvisual purposes? > Kevin you've combed through the acid tests, is this a concern? Hmmm.... I'm in the file right now and I'm searching 'imeout' to try to find instances of setTimeout and 'nterval' to try to find instances of setInterval. setInterval doesn't appear at all. setTimeout appears only twice. In both cases, it's called like this: setTimeout(update, delay); So what values does the variable 'delay' hold? It's set to 10 higher up. var delay = 10; However, there is also this reference to 5000ms in a comment: // we will give this test 500 attempts (5000ms) before aborting So based on what value they hardcoded, maybe you could conclude from this that the scale along which they are mapping the range from good responsiveness to poor responsiveness is measured in seconds and not tenths of a second? If that is right, I think the answer to your question is probably no and 500ms is faster than the values they used most of the time. 500ms is only 50 attempts, when they're willing to give the client ten times as long as that to finish a test. Kevin